@Mox, you just advanced to level 5!

https://wjactv.com/amp/news/local/pa-republican-lawmakers-analysis-finds-presidential-election-numbers-dont-add-up

I didn't assume anything... I mimicked your mocking style towards @Dedkraken I figured it was the way you preferred points to be made.

😂

Also on Injunctive Relief is the alleged facts are assumed true the Remedy requested may not match the Harm.

You did though, you said he didn't want to accept the truth, thats a big assumption about his character.

If you scroll up, you'll notice that the link he just posted is the first non picture he's posted for a source.... lol My mocking style is based in evidence and experience. Yours seems based in incomplete data.

It was obvious satire... Dedkraken had indicated it had been spammed here multiple times. HB made a claim that he did not look at the claim - I was mirroring the way the point was made. That's all.

I think you will find that I am rarely accused of having incomplete data...

Another good point, yes.

So from what I gather in this, is that they are saying the data from Sure was incomplete due to missing counties. Then why is the image citing that only a few small counties remain? Keep in mind, the individuals making the statement are ones who would inevitably be apart of the fraud, should it exist at all. Just saying.

https://law.justia.com/constitution/us/article-3/ Elements of cause of action are very numerous and complicated.

And the opposite can be said? All the people that said the problem existed were republicans?

Incomplete.

That would be easily provable... They could subpoena the people who built the SURE system and have them confirm or deny that the disparity system data is a very clear indication that fraud had occurred.

Usually not so much...@Mox

@TaLoN132 overcompleter.

It goes beyond that the data they were using didn’t mean what they claimed it meant. The more bodies they add into the hundreds required to pull off flawless fraud makes it less likely ofc

Again, this comes down to an innate distrust and treating political opponents as untrustworthy people trying to push communism on you.

And people treating political opposition as second-class citizens.

I'm sure it would be very easy, but no judges wanted to pursue it. lol.

That should tell you something other than "all these judges hate Trump"

Why would someone that's appointed by political officials want to get political?

Is that what it tells me?

Doesn't require judges... Law enforcement are free investigate crimes that they believe have occurred. This would have been a crime, obviously.

@Mox that's a question.

Are you saying they were primarily correct in their dismissal?

All law enforcement and prosecutors and judges and election workers and clerks are in on it

Why are you dismissing the judges dismissing cases?

Please, tell me.

I'd love to know.

Worse than that... They actually believe that their political opponents are seditious traitors in bed with the boogeyman.

I'm saying the dismissal seems a little too swift lol

If you say so.

They have to do this quickly because it's something of exigent circumstances.

So are you saying their dismissals are not valid?

And if so, why do you think that is?

Swift decision is exactly what is being asked for when pursuing injunctive relief.

I disagree with the use of exigent. I don't think the cases need to be rushed. The electors cast their votes, business as usual. The investigation gets... investigated.

Courts don't do investigations, law enforcement does investigations. Courts handle evidence.

Beside the point though.